About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 19
LANGUAGE
English 19
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19
of afghanistan to protect us from terrorist threats. by failing to draw down the number of troops in afghanistan, we continue to focus efforts away from the terrorists and needlessly put american soldiers in the line of fire. but this story is about more than numbers and figures, about it's real people who sacrifice everything to keep us safe. on sunday, april 3, of this year, a 21-year-old young marine named harry lu died while serving the country in afghanistan. he was a son of sandy and allen lu, the sister of carmen lu, and he was my nephew. harry died while serving on watch dudey -- duty in helmand province. his unit's goal was to provide security to locals. but three short months before he was set to return home he was gone. ending this year -- this war will save american lives. ending it will let us focus on fighting terrorism around the demrobe. ending the war will save money -- globe. ending war will save money at a time when we need it most. it is time to end the war in afghanistan, bring our troops home and begin seriously addressing our real security needs. the chair: the gentlelady
government will withdraw 500 troops from afghanistan by the end of 2012. reducing troop levels to 9,000. following his remarks he answered questions from the opposition leader and members of the house of commons on counterterrorism efforts with pakistan, setting up officer training academies for afghan police and security operations in the region. this is an hour. >> prime minister. >> thank you, mr. speaker. with the mission i'd like to make a statement on afghanistan. from the outset this government has sought to take a more hard-headed, more security-based approach to our mission. as i said, we're not there to build a perfect democracy. still less a model society. yes, we will help with the establishment of democratic institutions. yes, we can improve infrastructure, develop education, encourage development. but we are in afghanistan for one overriding reason, to ensure our own national security by helping the afghans to take control of theirs. this means building up the afghan security forces so we can drawdown british combat forces with the afghans themselves able to prevent al
in afghanistan and pakistan. not later than 120 days after enactment of this act, the entity described in subsection 8, shall submit to the president and the congress, a report. sense of congress, it is the sense of congress that the entity should be modeled on the iraq study group. section 8127, not more than $200 million may be expended -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise. mr. carter: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 31 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. carter of texas. strike lines 6 through 9 relating to military musical units. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. carter: i rise to address an issue i think is very important to the patriotic men and women who fight and defend our country. representative mccollum, in good graces, asked that we restrict the military band funding by $120 million and in an attempt to help with the savings. but the congressional budget office has informed us that this reduction, this $120 million re
a week in afghanistan. among the expenditures, our payment for projects that are rebuilding infrastructure in afghanistan, roads, bridges, schools, in some cases hospitals. "the washington post" recently reported that the afghan government is taxing american aid. we send money there to build a road. we have to hire contractors in order to do that. and the afghan government is trying to tax that money for their own coffers. so it's not enough that our taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on projects to rebuild their infrastructure. the afghan government is literally trying to reach in the pocket and double dip and tax our taxpayers for our taxpayers' generosity in giving them money. . how does that make any sense at all? after this was reported, they are stepping up their efforts to grab that cash. they are doing things like threatening to detain contractors. if they don't pay up, take money that's assigned to build that road and put that money in the afghan covers, the afghan officials are threatening to detain our contractors. they are denying licenses to our contract
rodriguez says he doesn't expect violence in afghanistan to start decreasing until next year. from the pentagon earlier today, this is 45 minutes. >> general rodriguez, it's counselor dave lapin at the pentagon. if you're ready to go, i'll introduce you and we'll get started. >> ok, dave, go ahead, thanks. >> thank you. good morning to those here, good evening in afghanistan. i'd like to welcome pack to the pentagon briefing room, army lieutenant general david rodriguez. he's commander of the international security assistance force joint command, also known as i.j.c. and also the deputy commander of the united states forces afghanistan. general rodriguez's current tour began in june, 2009, he became the first commander of the i.j.c. in october of that year. prior to that, general rodriguez was commander of regional command east for 15 months from january, 2007 to april, 2008. next week after two straight years in command and more than 40 months in after gap stan over the past 4 1/2 year, general rodriguez is ski wruled to change command and return stateside to have u.s. army forces
and done, iraq and afghanistan will suck the treasury dry to the tune of at least $3.7 trillion. enough already. mr. chairman, the pentagon is like that teenager. you keep giving the kid the keys to the car and he keeps crashing it. it's time we cut him off. we must draw the line and we must draw it here. no more money for libya. no more continuance in libyan hostilities. i urge my colleagues, support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: the gentleman says we have gone to war in the name of humanity. in other words, the president's war in libya is so that we can preserve humanity in libya. in the history of peoples, as the gentleman from california has pointed out, in the histories of countries, it has always been the king, the dictator, the tyrant, the chief, the leader that has sent that particular country to war. so when our ancestors got together and they formed a new and perfect union, they decided it would not be the leader,
have expanded radically with involvement in afghanistan and iraq. as we will hear, the u.s. as crated a police force in iraq that may number as many as 400,000 personnel. the goal of the u.s.-led nato training effort is at 157,000 police and the cost of this training program to the u.s. alone is about $1 billion per month. today, police assistance programs in the government are in multibillion-dollar effort led by the departments of defense and the department state but involving a number of other federal agencies. as programs have grown in size and cost, they also grow in kind. as you saw from the exhibition here on the screen, policing around the world is heavily impacted by history, culture, legal systems, and level of development. police forces differ markedly, so do they differ by agency and the country in which they work in. today, we have assembled a panel of very distinguished experts to discuss the various approaches that the u.s. government takes towards police training in foreign countries. you have the bad reviews for our speakers, so i will not do that. the speakers will c
on fuel and provide more enticing amenities to passengers. from afghanistan, the taliban says that their leader is alive and that a text message an internet posting announcing -- end internet posting announcing his death are fake. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> is weakened on "booktv," on c-span -- and this weekend on "booktv," on c-span2. on afterwards -- "after words," ben mezrich. look for the complete schedule at booktv.org. sign up for our e-mail alerts to get the schedule in your in box. -- inbox. >> "the supreme court" -- the new edition includes an interview with the newest supreme court justice, elena kagen, and you can add -- elena kagan. and you can add to your experience with -- "washington journal" continues. host: as we continue our precision about the debt ceiling and other related issues, we're pleased -- are, were stationed about the debt ceiling and other related issues, we're pleased to be joined by the chief deputy whip on the house side, peter welch. tell us why you voted against cut, cap, and balance ac yest today in the house
, afghanistan, and elsewhere. what we need to do is have a growth agenda. we need to reprioritize. so instead of subsidizing off-shore jobs, we are subsidizing the growth of manufacturing here in the united states. let me make my second point. this is what the is about. republicans put a bill on the floor that they call cut, cap, and balance. i called it cut, cap, balance, wink, and nod. it absolutely wasn't real. if you just lost your job, because it was out sourced. if you are the c.e.o., you made the million dollars, you get a $100,000 check in the mail tax cut. how is that fair? backbone of the american economy. and the bill on the floor was a kick to the stomach. we need solutions defend middle class than those who provide tax holes for the middle class. host: i want to ask about yesterday what was provided for the public? guest: if you were an auto broker, yeah, it was a good deal. but going into that deal, most was recouped. at the end of the process, yes, over $1 billion, if you are an auto worker, and you are checked your job, and we have a job analysis in the united states, and we n
down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of thelan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the w is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trlion. and another thing that's scored in tt, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way mr. reid scored that, which is phantom money,
but other nations throughout the world. we have officers deployed in afghanistan and iraq and several other countries throughout the world to do just that, to train and to build up that capacity. if your feelings are that we are not doing enough, please give me the information because we're very interested in that type of build up of capacity-building said that it will help protect your homeland and our homeland also. we would very much -- we would be very much interested in that. on the screen and intrusiveness, one of the things you would be interested in is that everything and anything we do within dhs and certainly cdp is an entity within dhs, the civil rights and civil liberties, but we're -- that reviews every activity that we undertake, that we're planning to undertake, and that we are looking to move toward, to ensure that what which is that when we do take actions, we take into account the civil rights and civil liberties that are of the highest trenches of the secretary and all of us that have historically worked this type of effort. the amount of equipment out there is tremendous
. not only as we wind down the two wars in afghanistan and iraq, i think as a general principle, we have to have a much more what i would call in mechanical factor on our resources, regardless of which branch of the service we are talking about. keep the military strong, make sure we are protecting our veterans, which we have not done a very good job at. i don't think we need the amount of money we're spending now for every military -- every apparatus we can think of. i don't think we can continue down that trail any longer. we cannot afford it and we don't need it. host: congressman bill pascrell is with us for another 15 minutes. republican -- helen, republican line. guest: good morning, helen. caller: i used to be a substitute teacher. the school i had had supplies. it was blessed. but the administration in our county is bloated, its bloated. because i was a substitute teacher, i listened. there is so much administrative and bureaucratic money wasted on education. but you holler, oh, the poor children and teachers, which is correct, but so much money is wasted in bureaucracy -- wasted
of iraq and afghanistan, it would take a serious look out of social security and medicare and in many cases contributing to this deficit. and it would say that those who benefit from ethanol subsidies and oil company tax breaks, the wealthiest people in this country would have to pay a little bit more to pay their fair share. something like that is what should be on the floor here this afternoon because it can pass, the president can sign it and it can solve the fiscal problems of this country or take us in the right direction. but we don't have something like that. instead we have a plan that says the following and puts it in the constitution, the guy who runs an ethanol company who gets massive public subsidies can make profits is completely left alone. he doesn't have to do anything. but for the woman who cleans his office at night is going to have to pay more to go to college, more for health care for herself, her children and her parents and more for just about anything she wants in her life. there's something wrong with that picture. sacrifice that is broadly shared is needed in
their lives in the service of our nation in iraq and afghanistan and their families and of all who serve in our armed forces and their families. the chair: without objection, two-minute voting will continue. the unfinished business is the request for a railroaded -- vord -- recorded vote on amendment number 2 by the gentleman from illinois, mr. rush, on which further proceedings were postponed, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 112-181, offered by mr. rush of illinois. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. this will be a two-minute vote, followed by a series of additional two-minute votes. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the chair: on this vote, the ye
infrastructure in afghanistan. the notion that the $90 million more that we need for the cftc because of the deficit is nonsense. they want to turn the sec into a profit center. you have a catch-22. first denied the sec and the cftc adequate funding. they in turn will not be able to deal with the rulemaking requirements that they have. because they have not been able to move as quickly on the rolls, the rules have to be abolished. that is something they have imposed. you want the sec and the cftc to have smart people and good information technology. this does not come from the financial institutions. if you've got the rules,, you want them will run.
study that found that the cost of the war -- that cumulative cost of the wars in iraq and afghanistan will but did up to -- it will be up to $4.2 trillion. i think it is a very taft common -- apt comment. he said that there may be odd tricks ready to go. what will act on the fiscal side, when we had the stimulus package, we at $800 billion. and it was a scramble of what to do with the money. why is it that the fiscal authority what do not have a well thought out plan in place that if we hit this level of project -- unemployment, we have these projects ready. the economy would be much more about -- able to rebound. the stimulus, that was not just handouts. these were funds for projects. there's some projects that are short term, but on the infrastructure side, these are certainly large enough -- coda new york city and spend a few days there. you confided up potholes' that need fixing, which employ a lot of people. host: this is from london of twitter. -- linda a look twitter. guest: that speaks to the declining standard of living that we have in the unemployment market where people tak
is going to count winding down the war in afghanistan as a substantial part of the savings. that could be worth about $1 trillion over 10 years. meanwhile, john boehner is working on his own deficit- reduction debt limit increase plan. he would take -- that plan would be affected in two stages. the first would be $900 trillion or so deficit reduction package, spending cuts, paired with roughly equal amount in debt limit increase. then he would empower a special committee to find an additional $1.60 trillion to authorize or trigger another increase in the debt ceiling. the problem with this proposal, however, it would require raising the debt ceiling by the requisite $2.40 trillion amount into the stages. that is something the president and democratic leaders after yesterday's said is a nonstarter. they say it would create too much uncertainty for the marketplace and the economy if this process had to be replaced at the beginning of next year or summer of next year. >> the house republicans made their own at last it with a cap and balance plan that did not make it to the senate. the pre
wars, afghanistan and iraq. borrowed money to do it. these are past expenditures. here we are, days away from the default crisis, where our republican friends are using this moment in time, where we're not really discussing tomorrow's expenditures, we're talking about yesterday's expenditures and they're saying, give us our way our else america defaults. mr. welch: representative garamendi, i think the message from the democrats in the house of representatives is straightforward and logical. mr. tonko: we said save medicare, make it stronger. then we talk about cutting, cutting programs that don't create jobs. do those cuts where there's no jobs created. where there are, save those programs, strengthen them, provide for jobs by investing in education, in innovation, and in infrastructure. and it's very easy when you take the education investment, the infrastructure investment and certainly the education investment that equals jobs for americans. middle class americans. and that's what it's all about. if we create jobs, it drives down the unemployment factor, drives down the deficit.
and afghanistan, or raising the debt ceiling. i grant that, but we are talking about something that is profoundly troubling and disturbing. for millions of americans, it is also a necessary. i mean, i thought what we were meant to do is try to clear up problems here. 10 years ago, the telephone industry said they will clear up the problems because they make us look bad if we do not, therefore you could trust us to do it, and they did not. all i am saying is we are going to stick with this. the sec stated yesterday that they are seeking comment on whether a band third party billing -- banned third-party billing -- they have settlements, the ftc, but that this stuff that is already done, and that is an admission of guilt. i am not a lawyer, but that is the way i read it. anyway, in the near future, i plan to introduce, working with colleagues from both sides of the aisle, legislation that will put a side -- stop to this because i simply cannot find any grain of sense in us having to have a hearing like this. and and, to have -- and to have all of you, you have not gone off of the -- gotten out of t
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19